Should'nt matter

I think that most of the problems with refereeing in any game could be ended by changing the emphasis from whether the referee’s call was correct. All that should matter is convincing the referee: not whether he was correct to be convinced.

In my world the job of a team would be to convince the referee that they had won the game. They would do that by winning the majority of plays in the mind of the referee.

For example, if a tennes player can convince the umpire that his ball was in then that is all that is required to fairly win the point. It does not matter if a fancy camera shows that the umpire was wrong, because the object was to convince the umpire.

Of course that would make the games very dependent on the honesty of the umpire. THere is a role for the fancy camera in showing whether an umpire is sufficiently good at his job to earn the privilege of presiding at the big games.